Bates Motel: Season One

Of the various grotesqueries that Bates Motel offers for our delectation, such as a surprisingly frank depiction of rape, a gory stabbing, a beaten and imprisoned Chinese teenage sex slave, and several portensions of blossoming madness, the most disturbing image, hands down, shows a young Norman Bates (Freddie Highmore) fiddling with an iPhone as he prepares for his first day at a new school. Yes, Bates Motel, which obviously takes its title from the setting of Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho, is a contemporary rethink of Norman’s unorthodox relationship with his manipulative, possibly deranged mother, Norma (Vera Farmiga).

The series appears to be a victim of marketing stratagems. Sure, Psycho> carries the “brand recognition” that studios appear to value above any and all common sense, but can viewers belonging to the all-important 18-to-30ish age quadrant be reasonably expected to tune in to a series inspired by a film from the 1960s? Executive producer Carlton Cuse (Lost) has called Bates Motel a “contemporary prequel” to Psycho, which is an evasive way of saying the show runners have borrowed the elements from the film that suit them with little regard as to whether they logically belong in a contemporary setting that’s otherwise informed by the most successful shows of the last 20 years.

Unsurprisingly, given this opportunistic grab-bag approach, Bates Motel exhibits virtually no feel for time or place. Norman, though a contemporary teen, still dresses in the priggish 1950s mode—all hiked-up trousers, plaid button-ups, and hand-me-down sweaters—that we associate with the Norman who once fatefully encountered Marion Crane. That could potentially make sense thematically, as Norman is meant to be a creature of another time, but occasionally we see teachers distractingly dressed as conservative school marms, while Norman’s bad-boy brother, Dylan Massett (Max Thieriot), broods in tailored, fussed-over duds that wouldn’t be out of place in the contemporary incarnation of 90210. Norma’s behavior is the least consistent, as she continually wafts back and forth between Norman and Dylan’s conflicting fashion senses: Occasionally she’s the oppressive asexual matriarch the film implied her to be, but she’s also capable of morphing into a sexy, chic, leather jacket-clad vamp when it occurs to the producers that a little cheesecake might be in order.

Bates Motel suggests what Gilmore Girls would’ve been like if it arbitrarily featured a tormented young Charles Manson.

These distracting anachronisms nurture an odd, ever-shifting tone that’s often ghoulish for reasons that appear to be mostly unintended. Most of us know the future that could await Norman and Norma, and while the show’s creators have suggested that Bates Motel might not adhere at all to the reality of the original film, they still occasionally foreshadow the film’s conclusion in order to imbue scenes with a gravity they haven’t earned on their own. We’re encouraged to wonder about Norman’s potential future as a madman, while simultaneously following him as he navigates the comparatively banal pitfalls of being a regular teen, such as braving his first kegger or befriending his first hottie (for some reason the girls, who also sport a very 21st-century sensibility, can’t get enough of Norman; even his English teacher shoots him “do me” vibes). Bates Motel often suggests what Gilmore Girls would’ve been like if it arbitrarily featured a tormented young Charles Manson buying a car or studying for an English test among its moments of perky pop banter.

Bates Motel is ultimately so disappointing for the simple reason that it really has nothing to do with even a revisionist version of the Bates Motel; the Psycho iconography has been used to spruce up a derivative mystery series that appears to be evolving into a teen-centric combination of Twin Peaks and Lost that will probably follow Norman as he discovers the dirty underbelly of his new town. That conceit isn’t inherently unpromising, but Cuse and his collaborators can’t commit to a singular sensibility that might seduce us into following Norman down the rabbit hole of madness. Bates Motel, admittedly, isn’t dull, and there are moments, such as the cliffhanger that concludes the third episode, that suggest the lurid, melodramatic camp classic it could have been and might eventually be. Greater offenses have been committed in the name of Psycho, such as the regrettable Psycho III, but this series might be less forgivable for the egregiously pandering waste of talent and potential on display.

Slant is reaching more readers than ever before, but advertising revenue across the Internet is falling fast, hitting independently owned and operated publications like ours the hardest. We’ve watched many of our fellow media sites fall by the way side in recent years, but we’re determined to stick around.

We’ve never asked our readers for financial support before, and we’re committed to keeping our content free and accessible—meaning no paywalls or subscription fees. If you like what we do, however, please consider becoming a Slant patron.

No mate, it's the WORST show on TV. Utter shite and will be glad when it ends for good. Alfred Hitchcock is probably spinning in his grave that this crap is on the air.

Posted by Jinny on 2015-07-06 20:26:21

You got it all wrong. - BEST show on TV!! Glad it's coming back.

Posted by Mark Anthony Vitelli on 2015-05-12 06:54:00

A well-written review. I just watched the first season on on demand and am pleasantly surprised. The premise begs to be sooo bad, filled with pathetic stereotypes, bad acting, embarrassing story lines. But!!! Fun characters, good acting and some depth in the story. I like that the main cop is confrontational and smart, since Norma is one of our main characters I would expect that her adversary would be slow-witted and stupid. But, he's with it. This demonstrates the strength of the writing when they're not afraid to challenge our 'hero' with some realistic threats. The older brother is also smart and states the truth (!!) that almost never happens in TV! He's not just a prop. Emma, the girl with CF, is also enchanting, sweet, smart...I love when writers assume that their audience is smart instead of overly digesting and dumbing down their material.I'm not saying it's a perfect show. Any campy show has unrealistic elements and silliness. And, my extremely low expectations contribute to my support of the show.

Posted by Becca Grayson on 2014-03-01 07:37:07

Yeah, dude- reading is painful and words hurt my head. I mean, I guess being on the internet means you have to read but, still. Ow.

Although, Jack probably has a point. This series likely doesn't deserve this much analysis. But... enjoy it? Ha. You're lucky I haven't seen it yet.

Posted by No-Personality on 2013-04-22 19:55:34

huh?

dude, wordy reviews suck ... just enjoy the show for what it is and get out of your head already! lol

Posted by jack white on 2013-04-19 23:29:43

Four shows in now, and it's definitely Peyton Place.

This is not necessarily bad, it all depends on the characters. Norman is becoming a very nicely shaded young version of his eventual Psycho self. Norma is well depicted as someone who is not all there herself, and who is influencing Norman.

The brother is an interesting character, as he is evolving.

The acting is all first rate.

However, the intense first episode, which appeared to show how Norman viewed the world through the sexualization of every woman he met, now appears to have been more to show how hot teenage girls look in tight pants.

What the show has introduced has none of the Twin Peaks eeriness or sense of art unfolding. The plotting so far is increasingly pedestrian, with Norman meeting two girls at school, both of whose hearts he will likely break, his mom under duress that is strictly a plot device (is she going to jail? really? where would the show be then?), and a boring "this clean town has a nasty underbelly" series of subplots that feel more thrown in.

What saves the show from this mechanical feel is the acting. The leads are terrific and deserve shows that have one dynamic theme/plotline.

In short, there feels like there is no cohesive whole, as there would be in even the flimsiest X Files episodes or, more to the point, even in any episode of the first season of American Gothic.

I'm still watching, there is still room for the show to grow. However, it's pretty hard right now to see how there could be more than one season of the show, unless they find something very different to focus on than Norman's increasing mental health challenges.

Posted by Victor Schwartzman on 2013-04-10 15:07:08

Very fair review.

I've seen two episodes. The pilot, I give 3.5 stars, the second show zero.

The pilot, and perhaps I misinterpreted it, did a marvelous job of creating Norman's very intense psycho-sexual view of the world. Every woman, not just other teenagers, but his teacher and even his mother are all seen by Norman as sexual objects. Further, sexual objects who are totally hot for him. It was effectively disturbing.

The pilot felt surreal for this reason, at least largely. Seeing the world through Norman's eyes was revealing, creepy and successfully done--IF that was what they were trying to do.

Unfortunately, the second episode seemed to drop that approach, and largely fall apart. Plot elements are still being introduced, yes, but can't things move more quickly? We saw a car crash and a badly burned man open the show. Apparently, it was just a plot device, there for a shock, because it was basically dropped until the very end of the show, when we saw a hanging burning corpse (retribution, apparently). Nor was the horror aspect duplicated during the rest of the show--so why start out that way?

The first son showing up was okay, and the dynamic around Norma, Norman and him was interesting. However, the scenes between Norma and son 1 were repetitive and went nowhere.

Mostly the felt show like it was treading water even while introducing new plot elements, not very good for a second episode. I got the feeling nothing will be resolved quickly, and I'm kinda hoping this show won't bring back memories of Rosie Larson's murder investigation.

And yes, there is a problem with time/place/consistency, but for me not so much for me that there is a mix of 1960's and 2013. It's jarring and noticeable, but that isn't the bigger problem.

Rather, they have the tone right around the Bates Motel--seedy, dead grass, barren. Why does the main street of the town look so cheerful? Should not everything in the series look creepy? If the idea was: the surface is pretty but the underbelly is awful, then the Bates Motel and house should look freshly painted and brand new, yes? The visual switch from the Bates Motel to virtually everything else is jarring.

It appears that rather than a murder-a-week-in-the-shower, the show is indeed going for a Twin Peaks vibe. Fine, but the problem with Twin Peaks was the show had nowhere to go and delayed its payoff--if there was a problem with Twin Peaks, that is.

I agree that the show needs to find a consistent vibe, but that's what third and fourth shows are for. It is certainly well acted and produced. But are they going for horror or Peyton Place?